There’s been a lot of press coverage on the fallout from last week’s override vote in Stoneham, but one editorial in particular got my attention. In Stoneham Sore Loser: Watch for Flagrant Foul on Taxpayer talk radio host Michael Graham accuses the town’s school committee of cutting the athletic program out of spite over losing the election…
Just 24 hours after the citizens of Stoneham refused to play along and pass a $3 million tax hike, the School Committee hit ?em back hard: They shut down the entire high school sports program.
.
Its the implication that this was a snap decision made in response to the election result that I just can’t let go unchallenged. As early as February when the first draft of the FY08 budget was presented at an open meeting the school committee has made it clear that the athletic program was at risk if significant additional funds weren’t found. They talked about it again when they held a public hearing on the school budget in April. Fewer than a dozen citizens bothered to show up at that hearing and the only questions or comments I can remember came from members of the finance committee. All through the override campaign we tried to make clear what services were at risk if the override didn’t pass. Anybody who thinks this was a sudden decision wasn’t paying attention for the last four months.
People can argue with the school committee’s sense of priorities. What you can’t do is accuse them of simply being sore losers. They are facing declining MCAS scores, accreditation warnings at the high school, inequitable Chapter 70 funding and rapidly escalating special education costs. Given all that, can anybody still make the argument that their first priority should be the sports program? I know these people and they’re heart broken over the depth of the cuts they’re having to make. Michael Graham should be ashamed of himself.
UPDATE (by David): Stoneham has just put in place a way to recoup some of the funds that the override would have provided: it will increase its fee for trash pickup, to $200 per household (from $160 now, according to jcsinclair in the comments). Not chump change. It would be interesting to know how much the override would have increased the average family’s property taxes. [Further update]: jcsinclair answers my question below. Thanks!
Are there any online financials for the Town of Stoneham and separate financials for the School? F/Y 07 and F/Y 08?
I meant f/y 07 and f/y 06.
Probably doesn’t have the school budget breakdown you’re looking for, but we published a lot of data in April’s special town meeting booklet. Go to the Stoneham Home Page and look for the link in the upper right corner of the page.
I see the special town meeting booklet, with lots of forecasted information, but little historical info.
<
p>
Transparency would go a long way, no? Is there an independent audit performed?
Basically, head counts across the board will be down around 20% since 2002. Over that same time frame health insurance premiums are up 130%, special ed costs up over $1M.
<
p>
Yes, there is an independent audit every year. The finance committee has an audit subcommittee that reviews the reports and helps make recommendations.
Gary: Of course…All data can be sent to you… Trouble is…the Town of Stoneham has made it very difficult to get all you want without paying a fortune to get it…
<
p>
Each year all public schools in the Commonwealth must submit to the Dept. of Education, an ‘End of Year Report’… What this shows is ‘all ‘ the sources of funding and ‘actual’ expenses of the particular school department.
I have the 2006 compiled if you email me…
<
p>
Surprisingly, people are actually shocked to learn…that their school budgets are ‘much, much, ‘ larger than they see or hear at their town meetings..
<
p>
They are also surprised to find that the school department does not only get money from the taxpayers…for the ‘so called ‘school budget’.. but the ‘Town side’, actually pays millions ‘silently’ people never find out about..
<
p>
For example: Our Town has a ‘public and heard’ approximately 22 million dollar ‘school budget’ but it actually , as you will see over 33 million !!…Reason?..
<
p>
The town pays for ‘Vocational Schools’, and ‘Charter Schools’….They also pay many other things.. There is one lady in Stoneham Town Hall, who works ‘exclusively’ on the School invoices..in the Town Accountant’s office.
<
p>
Also, if a parent wishes their child to go to a Vocational School other than the one assigned..in Wakefiled.. We must pay the extra tuition…
<
p>
We are also leasing three empty schools, (we thought we wer getting back when they built the 4 new schools).. and it is THE TOWN SIDE.. WHO PAYS THE INSURANCE ON THEM..
<
p>
The School Committee came to the town side.. and ‘received’ at Town Meeting, hundreds of thousands to repair the three leased schools of which the Schools ‘KEEP ALL THE LEASE MONEY’.. We spent $ 400,000 for an undergound oil tank at North School, A new boiler, asbestos windows, and a new roof at old East School ! The leases now total over $ 450,000…!
<
p>
WE are also paying close to a net $ 2 million in debt service for the new schools after reimbursement…AND NO.. readers.. it does not compute to 63%..much less..than you are hearing..Inside the school building contracts.. they also got 120,000 of textbooks.. computers..and more..no one mentions…
<
p>
The school system charges for athletics..They also charged the parents for Kindergarten and After school…and actually profited over $ 25,000 from these parents…and used it to buy copy paper and supplies !….That money should have gone back to the parents..!
<
p>
We are getting killed, not so much on Special Ed.. but by the ‘transportation costs.. mostly by North Reading Transportation….and outside tuition costs..Then we have ‘medical attention’ costs…about 2 million… Not really ‘education costs’…It’s getting to be more medical costs than education.. We have now over 550 kids on Special Ed.. out of a population of only 2900… What’s wrong with this picture..? Are WE GETTING INFILTRATED???? I THINK WE NEED AN INVESTIGATION..Sounds crazy.. I know..But all is ‘on the table’…to save our financial lives…
<
p>
I have the 07 and 08 budgets..of the town.. and I will send you the 2006 End of Year Report.. I have a lot of other information also…
<
p>
I do freelance writing…and contribute to the Stoneham Sun.. All my views ‘are not’ of the Stoneham Sun…All views I express are SOLELY MY OWN…Here and in my weekly column…
<
p>
Frank Pignone
Former Selectman
Former Water and Sewer Chairman
Sure, hack and slash away at music and art. Cut down the special education until it’s in violation of several federal and state laws. Jam students into a classroom until they run out of chairs, but not the sports! That’s what school’s all about!
<
p>
I hope they stick to their guns.
I love sports. I think sports are a great way to learn persistence, teamwork, courage, gracious winning and losing, and staying healthy. All excellent things.
<
p>
The arts develop most of those virtues — persistence, teamwork (band, theater, chorus), courage, gracious winning and losing (casting, solos, etc.) — as well as creativity, an utterly neglected and utterly necessary component of education.
<
p>
I do not understand, will never understand, why sports are so valued above the arts — hell, above academics — in our schools. Our valuing of physical talent above and to the exclusion of other traits is just damn primitive. That needs to be challenged.
A quick but good read.
<
p>
If we simply had a broader perspective. Instead, we are bound by traditions — such as school sports — that seem like they’ve been there forever, but in reality have a much shorter history in our schools.
<
p>
Your kidding—-right?
<
p>
Look at what any professional athlete makes viz a vis, the finest doctors, the most talented artists, the most brilliant scintists.
<
p>
Who do Americans revere the most, Tom Brady or Jonas Salk? Ask 95% of Americans who Jonas Salk is. I’m still sitting here laughing.
<
p>
The school committee is well aware what the taxpayers care about and it sure as hell isn’t read’n, and write’n.
<
p>
I’ve seen this tired ploy used so may times that now it just plain sad, but albeit effective.
…mass media. Their activities are the filler between commercials on TV and radio. I’m sure that, in the absence of TV and radio, some of them would do well, but not as well as they’re doing now. The broadcasting of their activities is also an advertisement–for them, hence their lucrative endorsement deals.
<
p>
Mass media has made some people well known and wealthy. Movie stars and pro athletes are the most obvious examples. Movie people and pro athletes who don’t do so well–you don’t hear of them because they go on to doing other things. But mass media is a visual medium (even radio, oddly enough). It would be difficult to get people excited over watching–much less listening to–people doing integration by parts.* I hate to continually harken back to Germany, but Bayrische Rundfunk, the Bavarian state broadcasting system, has an entire cable channel BR-Alpha, which is largely devoted to the various sciences. It is what PBS’s Nova should be, but isn’t. Fortunately, many of BR-Alpha’s programs are available for download over the Internet. Unfortunately, they don’t provide translations into Englisch. But it is an example of what a state-run educational broadcasting system could do if it were so inclined.
<
p>
*Integral calculus.
….also does well and is admired by the public? Mobsters and gangsters. Should we drop the three R’s and teach money laudering 101 instead?
<
p>
Now, I am not equating athletes or athleticism with illegal activity, I am making the point that just because something is profitable and admired doesn’t mean that is where tax dollars or education dollars should be spent. The average person who attends a public school and participates in sports will never earn a dime as an athlete. In fact I think it is fair to say that is almost a statistical impossibility, that is how few people rise to that level. How many people who get a good education that allows them to go to college and develop a career will profit from that experiment. Hmmm, just about everyone.
<
p>
Your point is idiotic.
people would at least know what interest charges are.
<
p>
That might help.
does anyone know the coach/athlete vs. teacher/student ratios in stoneham?
DOE (no link) indicated a Stoneham teacher headcount of 201 in f/y 2006.
Statistics here.
<
p>
2,894 students to 200 teachers = student to teacher ratio of 14.47
<
p>
2,894 students to 54 (assumed from the article) = student to coach ratio of 53.59.
<
p>
This also means there is more that 1 coaching job for every 4 teaching jobs over the entire district.
<
p>
Keep in mind that this includes students of all grades including pre-kindergarten, so the ratio of ‘students elligable for coaching’ to coaches is lower, not to mention ‘students coached’ to coaches.
<
p>
Leaving out the one ‘SP’ student (special ed?) here is how the ratio drops as each of the earliest grades is ‘peeled-off’ of the population.
<
p>
Grade Range, Students, Ratio
Gr pk – 12, 2893, 53.57
Gr k – 12, 2762, 51.15
Gr 1 – 12, 2550, 47.22
Gr 2 – 12, 2348, 43.48
Gr 3 – 12, 2136, 39.56
Gr 4 – 12, 1923, 35.61
Gr 5 – 12, 1718, 31.81
Gr 6 – 12, 1502, 27.81
Gr 7 – 12, 1286, 23.81
Gr 8 – 12, 1079, 19.98
Gr 9 – 12, 863, 15.98
Gr 10 – 12, 650, 12.04
Gr 11 – 12, 431, 7.98
Gr 12 only, 222, 4.11
<
p>
Assuming that fewer than half of each of these populations is actually ‘coached’ and you see what kind of numbers we are getting into… something like 12 to 1 or less.
…I wonder how many of those coaches are teachers. When I was in HS, lo those many years ago, many of the coaches were teachers. I suspect that they were paid extra for their coaching, but it probably didn’t amount to a lot.
<
p>
The teacher/coach-student ratio is not particularly interesting. What would be interesting is the actual cost of the extra-curricular sports program, in relation to the town’s or school’s budget. I would almost be willing to bet that the cost isn’t particularly high, except that it is probable that the insurance cost just for the program is probably fairly high relative to the total budget. It’s insurance cost that’s killing many of these programs.
<
p>
That said, I’ll repeat what I said elsewhere. It is obvious that, after a failure to approve a tax (whether or not an increase), the beneficiaries of the tax select a popular program to cut, or to otherwise charge for. I noticed that when I was growing up in a suburb of Cincinnati in the 1960s. Whenever voters would refuse to approve a tax for schools, they would cut sports programs (or charge for them), and even charge to ride on the school bus. Stoneham is obviously using the same tactic.
… teachers. Even if they are all teachers, the idea that over 1 and 4 teachers gets paid extra for a coaching gig would raise my eyebrow. As far as the tactic is concerned… does it not say something about the possible unrealistic assumptions about a community’s thoughts on what are non-essential and non-mission expenses? I mean you have a community that values sports, values education and values keeping taxes low. If these are in conflict and it showing them an impact on the sports program would solidify more thinking on these trade-offs,… sounds good to me. I’ve seen way too many a town meeting pass outrageously bad policies because nobody took a good look at the trade-offs to their tax policy. Getting everyone thinking about consequences is a good thing.
…what is interesting is, what is the cost of the various extra-curricular programs?
<
p>
I’ll grant you that the cost of extra-curricular sports programs should not be on the school budget, but instead should be a separate line (or lines) item on the town budget, to be voted on in town meeting separately (that’s the real issue, isn’t it?) but what is the cost of the various programs? If the town government does not want to fund one or more of the programs, the participants should either fund the programs themselves (pay to play and/or watch), or attempt to get funding elsewhere.
…on a general matter, the “body count” measure of government economy appears to have started with the Reagan malAdministration. The Reaganites were famous for saying how many fewer government employees there were than previously. What they failed to say was, that the tasks previously performed by government employees, were still performed. By private contractors, oftentimes at higher cost.
<
p>
It isn’t the body count that is important, it’s the cost.
Are you trying to say hiring enough math teachers is more important than the Thanksgiving Day Football Game?
<
p>
Shame on you!
<
p>
/snark off
<
p>
And people wonder why the American public education system lags behind the rest of the world?
We’re awesome at football* and isn’t that what really matters? Math is for sissy countries — real countries play…FOOTBALL!
<
p>
*Mainly because we’re the only ones who play it the way we do, but such concerns don’t keep Canadians fro mcrowing about their success in curling.
Well, none of this is surprising coming from Michael Graham. Perhaps the only suprising thing is that he’s so concerned about athletic activity, since he’s apparently even too lazy to think.
<
p>
From the article:
<
p>
<
p>
Yeah, how? Is Graham some sort of fiscal wizard that grows money on trees? Believe it or not, you need money to provide services. And sports don’t come cheap.
<
p>
<
p>
Perhaps so, which explains why parents shouldn’t be calling all the shots in school. I’m sure Graham is fond in different contexts of explaining that benefit “X” is simply a “privilege” and not a “right”. Though I think schools should certainly encourage athletics, there’s no question that sports SHOULD be the lowest on the educational totem pole, below academics, and below ensuring that adequate administration is in place so the school runs properly.
<
p>
<
p>
After wasting quite a few words on an article about sports programs, notice that this is the only place where he mentions other key cuts, including the arts. Pretty short shrift.
<
p>
<
p>
Well, as the increasingly right-wing Supreme Court reminded us this week, school is not a democracy.
We were going over the election results the other night and one thing that became clear is that there is a large block of voters in town who only vote in override elections. They skip the selectmen/school committee elections. They didn’t cast a vote for Governor or State Rep last fall. They don’t show up for town meeting. I have no way of knowing, but I’m going to guess that most of these folks voted NO last Tuesday.
that every one of them is over age 60.
It has been my experience in politics that the older voters are the only ones who are reliable.
<
p>
I have no idea what the turnout mechanisms were for the NO and YES sides of this particular override but it is this thinking that has made it so hard for us to win overrides this year.
<
p>
I would argue that its the disengaged younger folks e.g. parents and new homeowners who are showing up only for overrides and not for local,state and federal contests.
<
p>
JSinclair, its quite a jump to say its the no folks that are disengaged. Just because you say so. I went back and looked and Stoneham is a fairly purple town and by no means solid blue.
<
p>
Lets keep everyone on both sides motivated because the ideas of each side in the end carry the day.
I would argue that its the disengaged younger folks e.g. parents and new homeowners who are showing up only for overrides and not for local,state and federal contests.
<
p>
I firmly believe that elections–whether or not they are over-ride elections–should not be held except on generally recognized election days. I would prefer the November elections.
Raj, I couldnt agree more with you on this.
<
p>
They should be in November or at the very least on normal day of municipal elections in each town.
<
p>
Think of the positive effect this would have on total participation. Whoever it was who showed up in Stoneham would be participating in the election too!
Arrange a free all-day bus trip to Foxwoods in town.
My comment was directed strictly at the voters who only vote in override elections. My assumption was based on the idea that if you care enough about your town to voluntarily agree to raise your own taxes, you’re probably much more likely to want to have a say in other town elections. Trust me, we have plenty of engaged NO votes.
He hasn’t let facts get in the way of a good tirade in the past. Why would he start now?
The trash fee is not new. We’ve had a $160/household fee this year. If the override had passed the trash fee would have been eliminated. Our calculations estimated that the override would have cost the average household abour $400. Subtract the trash fee and the net increase would have been around $240. That amount would have been tax deductible and all property owners would have shared in the burden. Now what we have is a regressive $200 fee that is not tax deductible and can be avoided by businesses and condominiums that opt out of the town pickup.
<
p>
I didn’t make it over to the selectmen’s meeting until after the vote had already been taken, but I talked to a couple people afterwords and it looks like the three selectmen who voted for the trash fee will make sure the schools get enough money to keep the athletic program alive and the rest of the town will have to get by on whatever’s left.
Did you check the statistics for the number of students enrolled @ the H.S? WHY does the H.S need 2 Asst. Principals? Why did the outgoing Superintendent get paid per diem for a full 6 months AFTER retiring? Why hasn’t anyone addressed the fact that the Stoneham teachers have been w/o a contract for one full year, yet have been doing their jobs w/o going to the media?
I’m all for sports, but let’s face it… it isn’t the end all to success in our world. It is, however, the buzz topic which will tug at heartstrings. I’m willing to pay extra for quality education, but not to see our illustrious School Committee turn around and add more money to the administration (oh, not just salaries, but the budget pays for THEIR subscriptions, THEIR recertification costs, etc unlike teachers who have to dig into their shallow pockets.)
No, there is much more here than just reinstating sports. Our schools have been declining for years. We “needed” new schools, yet how ironic that North Reading (one of the TOP MCAS scoring towns in the state…) rented out Central School while they were renovating? Central School, a school which was in too deplorable condition for OUR kids. This goes beyond the override vote, it stems from the years of mismanagement. It’s time to reevaluate our so called “democratic” form of government in this town.